[This is NOT a debate about whether objective reality exists or not, don't sidetrack]

There are insane amounts of debates about whether god(s) exist in objective reality or not. This debate is a huge waste of time. First off, any god concept that would matter objectively seems highly unlikely. These are the gods who interfere in life all the time, care about petty things, require constant worship and praise, obviously creators of ALL who are not "evil" are absolutely unsound, etc etc etc. Really even this does not matter. Belief in god is just as important when discussing religion. The power of belief is absolutely amazing, but belief does not yeild objective evidence. Ever notice how only those who believe in possession get possessed? How no matter how intensely you pray you cannot get the impossible accomplished, like regrowing a limb? This is all because the strength of things like prayer are in belief. There is not a Vatican ambassador because of fear from God but because of the millions of BELIEVErs.

So, what is my point? Arguing god's objective existence is pointless. Most obvious is that no agreement will be reached. Also take into account that neither side can empirically or logically prove itself correct! When it comes to the mind, however, gods do indeed exist there. Objective deities are not require for beliefs, rituals, symbols to work. Beliefs affect people on the same level that a real deity would, that's why believers of contradictory religions share many of the same traits! The deities may as well be treated as if the exist because, in the mind, they do.

[This is NOT a debate about whether objective reality exists or not, don't sidetrack]

There are insane amounts of debates about whether god(s) exist in objective reality or not. This debate is a huge waste of time. First off, any god concept that would matter objectively seems highly unlikely. These are the gods who interfere in life all the time, care about petty things, require constant worship and praise, obviously creators of ALL who are not "evil" are absolutely unsound, etc etc etc. Really even this does not matter. Belief in god is just as important when discussing religion. The power of belief is absolutely amazing, but belief does not yeild objective evidence. Ever notice how only those who believe in possession get possessed? How no matter how intensely you pray you cannot get the impossible accomplished, like regrowing a limb? This is all because the strength of things like prayer are in belief. There is not a Vatican ambassador because of fear from God but because of the millions of BELIEVErs.

So, what is my point? Arguing god's objective existence is pointless. Most obvious is that no agreement will be reached. Also take into account that neither side can empirically or logically prove itself correct! When it comes to the mind, however, gods do indeed exist there. Objective deities are not require for beliefs, rituals, symbols to work. Beliefs affect people on the same level that a real deity would, that's why believers of contradictory religions share many of the same traits! The deities may as well be treated as if the exist because, in the mind, they do.

93, 93/93.

The arguments are not pointless. I was a Muslim. I listened to many debates on this topic amongst others. Now I am no longer a Muslim. My life is better.

[This is NOT a debate about whether objective reality exists or not, don't sidetrack]

There are insane amounts of debates about whether god(s) exist in objective reality or not. This debate is a huge waste of time. First off, any god concept that would matter objectively seems highly unlikely. These are the gods who interfere in life all the time, care about petty things, require constant worship and praise, obviously creators of ALL who are not "evil" are absolutely unsound, etc etc etc. Really even this does not matter. Belief in god is just as important when discussing religion. The power of belief is absolutely amazing, but belief does not yeild objective evidence. Ever notice how only those who believe in possession get possessed? How no matter how intensely you pray you cannot get the impossible accomplished, like regrowing a limb? This is all because the strength of things like prayer are in belief. There is not a Vatican ambassador because of fear from God but because of the millions of BELIEVErs.

So, what is my point? Arguing god's objective existence is pointless. Most obvious is that no agreement will be reached. Also take into account that neither side can empirically or logically prove itself correct! When it comes to the mind, however, gods do indeed exist there. Objective deities are not require for beliefs, rituals, symbols to work. Beliefs affect people on the same level that a real deity would, that's why believers of contradictory religions share many of the same traits! The deities may as well be treated as if the exist because, in the mind, they do.

93, 93/93.

The arguments are not pointless. I was a Muslim. I listened to many debates on this topic amongst others. Now I am no longer a Muslim. My life is better.

I could be wrong, but I think the point is it doesn't matter if your god exists only in your mind, or not; that which influences your reality is that which you believe.

[This is NOT a debate about whether objective reality exists or not, don't sidetrack]

There are insane amounts of debates about whether god(s) exist in objective reality or not. This debate is a huge waste of time. First off, any god concept that would matter objectively seems highly unlikely. These are the gods who interfere in life all the time, care about petty things, require constant worship and praise, obviously creators of ALL who are not "evil" are absolutely unsound, etc etc etc. Really even this does not matter. Belief in god is just as important when discussing religion. The power of belief is absolutely amazing, but belief does not yeild objective evidence. Ever notice how only those who believe in possession get possessed? How no matter how intensely you pray you cannot get the impossible accomplished, like regrowing a limb? This is all because the strength of things like prayer are in belief. There is not a Vatican ambassador because of fear from God but because of the millions of BELIEVErs.

So, what is my point? Arguing god's objective existence is pointless. Most obvious is that no agreement will be reached. Also take into account that neither side can empirically or logically prove itself correct! When it comes to the mind, however, gods do indeed exist there. Objective deities are not require for beliefs, rituals, symbols to work. Beliefs affect people on the same level that a real deity would, that's why believers of contradictory religions share many of the same traits! The deities may as well be treated as if the exist because, in the mind, they do.

93, 93/93.

The arguments are not pointless. I was a Muslim. I listened to many debates on this topic amongst others. Now I am no longer a Muslim. My life is better.

I could be wrong, but I think the point is it doesn't matter if your god exists only in your mind, or not; that which influences your reality is that which you believe.

[This is NOT a debate about whether objective reality exists or not, don't sidetrack]

There are insane amounts of debates about whether god(s) exist in objective reality or not. This debate is a huge waste of time. First off, any god concept that would matter objectively seems highly unlikely. These are the gods who interfere in life all the time, care about petty things, require constant worship and praise, obviously creators of ALL who are not "evil" are absolutely unsound, etc etc etc. Really even this does not matter. Belief in god is just as important when discussing religion. The power of belief is absolutely amazing, but belief does not yeild objective evidence. Ever notice how only those who believe in possession get possessed? How no matter how intensely you pray you cannot get the impossible accomplished, like regrowing a limb? This is all because the strength of things like prayer are in belief. There is not a Vatican ambassador because of fear from God but because of the millions of BELIEVErs.

So, what is my point? Arguing god's objective existence is pointless. Most obvious is that no agreement will be reached. Also take into account that neither side can empirically or logically prove itself correct! When it comes to the mind, however, gods do indeed exist there. Objective deities are not require for beliefs, rituals, symbols to work. Beliefs affect people on the same level that a real deity would, that's why believers of contradictory religions share many of the same traits! The deities may as well be treated as if the exist because, in the mind, they do.

93, 93/93.

The arguments are not pointless. I was a Muslim. I listened to many debates on this topic amongst others. Now I am no longer a Muslim. My life is better.

I could be wrong, but I think the point is it doesn't matter if your god exists only in your mind, or not; that which influences your reality is that which you believe.

Correct. Ideas themselves exist.

I agree ideas exist. (How could I not?) Yet, to say they exist alone is not provable.

If God objectively exists, does that matter? Of course it does!If God could be objectively proven, then it would have a huge impact on the lives of every human being on earth. Rather than being mired in subjectivity, God's attributes could be truly known and we could know God as He truly is.This is no small matter; in fact, it would change the way we think about everything.Most of the "evidences" for God's existence are foolish and usually end up being fodder for debate forums such as this.Descartes reasoned that by proving his own existence he could therefore prove the existence of a transcendental being. His logic follows this pattern: mind-->self-->god.Therefore his god is subjective and can only be "proven" by his own mind, effectively ending any discussion about Descartes god.Augustine reasoned that by doubting, there must be something to be doubted. Similar to Descartes he used his mind to seek his own existence and the "something" that he doubted. Augustine's conclusion to his search came in the form of revelation. Rather than have his view of god generate only from his mind he turned to Scripture. The Bible is the objective standard to which we can find that "something" we once doubted. Rather than having the mind as the ultimate source of our view of God, we can turn to Scripture.For Descartes, god was only a subjective entity that came from his mind. For Augustine, he went beyond his subjective mind to an authoritative source.

[This is NOT a debate about whether objective reality exists or not, don't sidetrack]

There are insane amounts of debates about whether god(s) exist in objective reality or not. This debate is a huge waste of time. First off, any god concept that would matter objectively seems highly unlikely. These are the gods who interfere in life all the time, care about petty things, require constant worship and praise, obviously creators of ALL who are not "evil" are absolutely unsound, etc etc etc. Really even this does not matter. Belief in god is just as important when discussing religion. The power of belief is absolutely amazing, but belief does not yeild objective evidence. Ever notice how only those who believe in possession get possessed? How no matter how intensely you pray you cannot get the impossible accomplished, like regrowing a limb? This is all because the strength of things like prayer are in belief. There is not a Vatican ambassador because of fear from God but because of the millions of BELIEVErs.

So, what is my point? Arguing god's objective existence is pointless. Most obvious is that no agreement will be reached. Also take into account that neither side can empirically or logically prove itself correct! When it comes to the mind, however, gods do indeed exist there. Objective deities are not require for beliefs, rituals, symbols to work. Beliefs affect people on the same level that a real deity would, that's why believers of contradictory religions share many of the same traits! The deities may as well be treated as if the exist because, in the mind, they do.

93, 93/93.

Only true prophets and saints know our Creator within His mind. We saints learn that we exist within His mind as invisible energy. Energy does not take up space, time or mass. Energy is information and information is God's spoken thoughts, which is who we are.

At 12/2/2013 9:25:46 PM, JayLewis wrote:If God objectively exists, does that matter? Of course it does!

Which god? There are quite literally billions of them. So which one's existence matters?

Regarding the topic, I was generally referring to the concept of a transcendental being. If this could be objectively proven (and I believe it can, though many people dismiss common theistic arguments) then atheism would become void. Once a transcendental being is objectively proven, then this being must be defined. That's where we get to the specifics. Can this being be known? Is it physical or spiritual? What has been revealed to us regarding this being? Is it Allah, Jehovah, Brahma, or do we even know its name?Regarding the specifics, I was referring to Jehovah the covenant God of the Bible; however regarding the general topic I was simply referring to a transcendental being

[This is NOT a debate about whether objective reality exists or not, don't sidetrack]

There are insane amounts of debates about whether god(s) exist in objective reality or not. This debate is a huge waste of time. First off, any god concept that would matter objectively seems highly unlikely. These are the gods who interfere in life all the time, care about petty things, require constant worship and praise, obviously creators of ALL who are not "evil" are absolutely unsound, etc etc etc. Really even this does not matter. Belief in god is just as important when discussing religion. The power of belief is absolutely amazing, but belief does not yeild objective evidence. Ever notice how only those who believe in possession get possessed? How no matter how intensely you pray you cannot get the impossible accomplished, like regrowing a limb? This is all because the strength of things like prayer are in belief. There is not a Vatican ambassador because of fear from God but because of the millions of BELIEVErs.

So, what is my point? Arguing god's objective existence is pointless. Most obvious is that no agreement will be reached. Also take into account that neither side can empirically or logically prove itself correct!

I would disagree with this. There is a "best answer", even if we cannot know for certain--we pretty much can't know ANYTHING truly for certain, so we're ALWAYS looking for the best answer.

When it comes to the mind, however, gods do indeed exist there. Objective deities are not require for beliefs, rituals, symbols to work.

If by "work" you mean "provide solely psychological comfort", then yes, I suppose you're right. But you may as well argue that finding medicine that works is pointless, since placebos can have an effect, too.

Beliefs affect people on the same level that a real deity would, that's why believers of contradictory religions share many of the same traits!

That's not true.

The deities may as well be treated as if the exist because, in the mind, they do.

So anything that can be fantasized about exists? Are you advocating the complete abandonment of rational inquiry?

93, 93/93.

What's with the 93?

Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!

At 12/2/2013 9:25:46 PM, JayLewis wrote:If God objectively exists, does that matter? Of course it does!

Which god? There are quite literally billions of them. So which one's existence matters?

Regarding the topic, I was generally referring to the concept of a transcendental being. If this could be objectively proven (and I believe it can, though many people dismiss common theistic arguments) then atheism would become void. Once a transcendental being is objectively proven, then this being must be defined. That's where we get to the specifics. Can this being be known? Is it physical or spiritual? What has been revealed to us regarding this being? Is it Allah, Jehovah, Brahma, or do we even know its name?Regarding the specifics, I was referring to Jehovah the covenant God of the Bible; however regarding the general topic I was simply referring to a transcendental being

At 12/2/2013 9:25:46 PM, JayLewis wrote:If God objectively exists, does that matter? Of course it does!If God could be objectively proven, then it would have a huge impact on the lives of every human being on earth. Rather than being mired in subjectivity, God's attributes could be truly known and we could know God as He truly is.This is no small matter; in fact, it would change the way we think about everything.Most of the "evidences" for God's existence are foolish and usually end up being fodder for debate forums such as this.Descartes reasoned that by proving his own existence he could therefore prove the existence of a transcendental being. His logic follows this pattern: mind-->self-->god.Therefore his god is subjective and can only be "proven" by his own mind, effectively ending any discussion about Descartes god.Augustine reasoned that by doubting, there must be something to be doubted. Similar to Descartes he used his mind to seek his own existence and the "something" that he doubted. Augustine's conclusion to his search came in the form of revelation. Rather than have his view of god generate only from his mind he turned to Scripture. The Bible is the objective standard to which we can find that "something" we once doubted. Rather than having the mind as the ultimate source of our view of God, we can turn to Scripture.For Descartes, god was only a subjective entity that came from his mind. For Augustine, he went beyond his subjective mind to an authoritative source.

How would it change anything? If God exists it does not seem to have any effect on our lives here. Did learning atoms make up everything? No, it explained things but it actually changed nothing except what we know.

[This is NOT a debate about whether objective reality exists or not, don't sidetrack]

There are insane amounts of debates about whether god(s) exist in objective reality or not. This debate is a huge waste of time. First off, any god concept that would matter objectively seems highly unlikely. These are the gods who interfere in life all the time, care about petty things, require constant worship and praise, obviously creators of ALL who are not "evil" are absolutely unsound, etc etc etc. Really even this does not matter. Belief in god is just as important when discussing religion. The power of belief is absolutely amazing, but belief does not yeild objective evidence. Ever notice how only those who believe in possession get possessed? How no matter how intensely you pray you cannot get the impossible accomplished, like regrowing a limb? This is all because the strength of things like prayer are in belief. There is not a Vatican ambassador because of fear from God but because of the millions of BELIEVErs.

So, what is my point? Arguing god's objective existence is pointless. Most obvious is that no agreement will be reached. Also take into account that neither side can empirically or logically prove itself correct!

I would disagree with this. There is a "best answer", even if we cannot know for certain--we pretty much can't know ANYTHING truly for certain, so we're ALWAYS looking for the best answer.

When it comes to the mind, however, gods do indeed exist there. Objective deities are not require for beliefs, rituals, symbols to work.

If by "work" you mean "provide solely psychological comfort", then yes, I suppose you're right. But you may as well argue that finding medicine that works is pointless, since placebos can have an effect, too.

Beliefs affect people on the same level that a real deity would, that's why believers of contradictory religions share many of the same traits!

That's not true.

The deities may as well be treated as if the exist because, in the mind, they do.

So anything that can be fantasized about exists? Are you advocating the complete abandonment of rational inquiry?

93, 93/93.

What's with the 93?

1. All things like prayer accomplish IS psychological comfort, there is no objective supernatural force needed to explain how the power of belief works. Medication, on the other hand, has objective affects which fill the role that God actually existing would fill in the metaphor. However, if a placebo will help with pain, i would rather take that than risk addiction and health with opiates.

2. You're actually correct that beliefs do not affect individuals as a deity would. A deity could do things like regrowing limbs and instantly cure cancer or mental disorders. Prayers for such things never come true because belief alone cannot help there and no deities are involved.

3. Yes, all ideas exist. If I ask you to describe a unicorn you can, correct? This doesn't mean unicorns objectively exist, they likely do not.

If you believe prayers are answered by an objective external source, that's an entirely different thing.

there is no objective supernatural force needed to explain how the power of belief works.

Very correct. But, again, a placebo or psychological benefit is wholly different from an actual supernatural one.

Medication, on the other hand, has objective affects which fill the role that God actually existing would fill in the metaphor. However, if a placebo will help with pain, i would rather take that than risk addiction and health with opiates.

You wouldn't risk health with opiates, and addiction, if planned for, can be managed. If you're in chronic pain, it's entirely possible the placebo either won't, or will stop, working. Similar with prayer. If it's just placebo instead of real medicine (which is what I think), then it's entirely different, and it's worth knowing that.

2. You're actually correct that beliefs do not affect individuals as a deity would. A deity could do things like regrowing limbs and instantly cure cancer or mental disorders. Prayers for such things never come true because belief alone cannot help there and no deities are involved.

Right. But if you believe that God will, for example, cure your child and so you don't take them to the doctor, and the kid dies, that's a real harm, coming from your belief. That sort of thing is why it matters.

3. Yes, all ideas exist. If I ask you to describe a unicorn you can, correct? This doesn't mean unicorns objectively exist, they likely do not.

Right--and there is a difference between things existing and things not existing. Pretending that difference doesn't matter seems absurd.

Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!

If you believe prayers are answered by an objective external source, that's an entirely different thing.

there is no objective supernatural force needed to explain how the power of belief works.

Very correct. But, again, a placebo or psychological benefit is wholly different from an actual supernatural one.

Medication, on the other hand, has objective affects which fill the role that God actually existing would fill in the metaphor. However, if a placebo will help with pain, i would rather take that than risk addiction and health with opiates.

You wouldn't risk health with opiates, and addiction, if planned for, can be managed. If you're in chronic pain, it's entirely possible the placebo either won't, or will stop, working. Similar with prayer. If it's just placebo instead of real medicine (which is what I think), then it's entirely different, and it's worth knowing that.

2. You're actually correct that beliefs do not affect individuals as a deity would. A deity could do things like regrowing limbs and instantly cure cancer or mental disorders. Prayers for such things never come true because belief alone cannot help there and no deities are involved.

Right. But if you believe that God will, for example, cure your child and so you don't take them to the doctor, and the kid dies, that's a real harm, coming from your belief. That sort of thing is why it matters.

3. Yes, all ideas exist. If I ask you to describe a unicorn you can, correct? This doesn't mean unicorns objectively exist, they likely do not.

Right--and there is a difference between things existing and things not existing. Pretending that difference doesn't matter seems absurd.